RE: [dhcwg] DHC WG charter

Jim:

Yes mobility and prefix delegation would be good to consider. I think it
might already be addressed by:
>   - Develop extensions to DHCPv6 for prefix delegation, DNS
>     configuration, etc.

Regarding your addition:
>- Determine the requirements for DHC to support the dynamic renumbering
>of networks using fast path delegaion as CPE front end between ISP and
>Private Networks.

This seems too specific and I'm not exactly sure what it means. Perhaps the
requirement is to determine how DHCP can be used to assist in rapid
renumbering of networks?

- Bernie

-----Original Message-----
From: Bound, Jim [mailto:Jim.Bound@hp.com]
Sent: Thursday, June 13, 2002 9:37 AM
To: Ralph Droms; dhcwg@ietf.org
Subject: RE: [dhcwg] DHC WG charter

Ralph,

I think we need to add something to the charter for Mobility and Prefix delegation for IPv6.  I think this team and group can do a lot of good and help with evolution of wireless networks and the integration of Mobile.  Specifically:

- Determine the requirements for DHC to support the dynamic renumbering of networks using fast path delegaion as CPE front end between ISP and Private Networks.

What do others think?  I just think we have work to do in this space and not sorted it all out yet.  But do we have to for a charter?

thanks
/jim

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ralph Droms [mailto:rdroms@cisco.com]
> Sent: Thursday, June 13, 2002 8:27 AM
> To: dhcwg@ietf.org
> Subject: [dhcwg] DHC WG charter
> 
> 
> The Internet ADs have suggested it is time (likely
> *way* past time) to revisit the DHC WG charter.  Here's a 
> first pass at
> what I see as the issues currently in front of the WG.  The 
> objectives are
> not presented in any particular order.
> 
> Please review and send your comments to the mailing list.  The goal is
> to have consensus on a list of objectives for final review at the WG
> meeting in Yokohama.
> 
> - Ralph
> 
> =====
> 
> The working group has the following primary objectives:
> 
> * Develop additional authentication protocols within the framework
>   defined in RFC3118, along with other mechanisms to mitigate the
>   threat of attacks on DHCP clients and servers:
>   - New RFC3118 protocols to address improved key management and
>     improved scalability
>   - Provide security for messages passed between relay agents and
>     servers
>   - Consider solutions for specific threats such as use of nonce
>     identifier to defend against DoS attacks through FORCERENEW from
>     off-path attackers
> 
> * Complete the specification of DHCP for IPv6 (DHCPv6):
>   - Gain acceptance and publication of current Internet Draft as
>     Proposed Standard
>   - Develop and publish specifications for options and other
>     extensions to DHCPv6, including those already published as
>     Internet Drafts:
>     + "DNS Configuration Options for DHCPv6"
>     + "Time Configuration Options for DHCPv6"
>     + "NIS Configuration Options for DHCPv6"
>     + "DSTM Ports Option for DHCPv6", "DSTM Options for DHCPv6"
>     + "Load Balancing for DHCPv6"
>   - Encourage independent implementations and conduct interoperability
>     testing
>   - Revise specification and publish for acceptance as Draft Standard
>     by 6/30/2002
>   - Develop extensions to DHCPv6 for prefix delegation, DNS
>     configuration, etc.
> 
> * Revise and submit the DHCP specification for acceptance as a Full
>   Standard
> 
> * Complete the specification and publish work in progress as
>   standards:
>   - Failover protocol
>   - DHCP/DDNS interaction
>   - SNMP MIB
>   - Host name options
>   - Other client and relay agent options
> 
> * Review new options for DHCP, as deemed appropriate by the working
>   group and/or the Internet area directors
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> dhcwg mailing list
> dhcwg@ietf.org
> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dhcwg
> 

_______________________________________________
dhcwg mailing list
dhcwg@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dhcwg